On 30/11/06, The Cunctator <cunctator(a)gmail.com> wrote:
My take is that you can define the quality of
Wikipedia to be a function of
both the depth of coverage (using that as shorthand for the whole
specific/accurate/verifiable/sourced class of concepts) and the breadth of
coverage (i.e. not missing information).
Yes. The *breadth* of en:wp's coverage is actually a reason I've heard
from many who speak another language natively for preferring en:wp as
a reference - there's more likely to be something, anything, on a
given subject here than anywhere else, and a better something than
you'd get from a Google search.
Our breadth is a strength, not a weakness. We don't have to have a
30,000-byte article on something to be a useful source on it.
- d.